Hassan Diab’s fight for justice continues! His lawyer is preparing a constitutional challenge to Canada’s extradition law and an appeal of the judge’s shocking decision to commit Hassan for extradition to France.

The judge decided to commit Hassan for extradition based solely on a French handwriting analysis report that alleges similarities between handwriting appearing on a Paris hotel registration card in 1980 and Hassan’s handwriting. The judge described the French report as “very problematic”, “very convoluted”, “very confusing”, “pseudo-science”, and “with conclusions that are suspect”. However, the judge stated that his hands are tied by Canada’s extradition law, and that he had no choice but to order Hassan’s extradition.

Canada’s extradition law allows foreign countries to seize any Canadian citizen based on a mere summary of the allegations. The foreign state can cherry-pick its case and suppress exonerating evidence. (The fact that Hassan’s palm and finger prints do not match those of the suspect was suppressed from the Record of the Case.) The extradition court must treat the foreign state’s evidence as presumptively reliable, and the burden is placed on the accused to prove that the case is “manifestly unreliable”. In practice, however, it is almost impossible to demonstrate manifest unreliability.

If extradited, Hassan will not receive a fair trial in France’s anti-terrorism courts, which place severe limitations on the ability of the defence to challenge the handwriting analysis, and allow the use of un-sourced secret intelligence that may be the product of torture.

Hassan continues to live under very strict bail conditions and is saddled with the onerous expense of his own GPS monitoring — $2,000 per month — as well as hefty legal fees.

Please help us challenge the fundamental unfairness of Canada’s extradition law and prevent a gross injustice.

Why exonerating evidence was not allowed in court
How Canada’s extradition law is fundamentally unfair
Why a fair trial in France is unlikely

Sponsored by the Departments of Law, Sociology and Anthropology and the Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies (Human Rights) at Carleton University; CUPE Local 4600; and the Canadian Association of University Teachers.

“While some have asked why Dr. Diab doesn’t simply throw in the towel and go to France and “sort out the mess,” the answer is simple: France has been criticized by the international community and is currently before the European Court of Human Rights for violating Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights – the fair trial right – for running terrorist trials based on secret, anonymous intelligence.” In addition, why should someone give up their life in Canada and risk spending years fighting in another country, especially given the slipshod “case” against them?

The Diab case is a wake-up call for everyone in Canada… the ease with which an everyday regular life can be disrupted by such a case is frightening.”